Via Jim Davila I learned that Harvard Magazine has an article which explains why announcing the results of the scientific dating of the fragment known as the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife took so long, and what the outcome is at the end of that process. Larry Hurtado also mentioned the breaking news, with links to the Harvard Divinity School website and from there to the relevant articles in the latest issue of Harvard Theological Review.
Apparently the second attempt at carbon dating suggests that the papyrus is from around 700 CE.
Does this mean that the text is not a “forgery”? No, but it deoends what one means. But it does indicate that the scientific data is compatible with the text being an ancient “forgery” rather than a modern one.
Be sure to read Jim Davila’s comments as well as the Harvard articles linked above. UPDATE: The blogosphere and news sources have been picking up the story left, right, and center. And so I am adding links as appropriate to further thoughts by Larry Hurtado, Brice Jones, Daniel Burke on CNN’s Belief Blog, Tony Burke, John Byron, Jared Calaway, Chris Skinner, Katie Grimes, James Tabor, and G. W. Schwendner (twice, albeit both briefly). See also now the cautionary remarks of Christopher Rollston, and posts by Kushana Torumekia, Bob Cargill, Michael Heiser, and Peter Konieczny.